BANNED

The best a stock Grand National had was the GNX and that was only 274 horse and not that much torque. Big money needs to be spent to make a 2004R hold up to 500 horse. But then, if the OP only has 250 horse then I suppose that a 2004R may hold up.

And remember, a turbo car's power doesn't come on until its mass is already moving.

Member

This has been debated so many times on here, fact is, the second gen 700r4 is so much better. The through put shaft, the bearing planetary gear and so on. The 200 isnt even in the same league. BUT it doesnt make the 200r4 a bad tranny. Its just not a 700r4 and never will be....

BANNED

This has been debated so many times on here, fact is, the second gen 700r4 is so much better. The through put shaft, the bearing planetary gear and so on. The 200 isnt even in the same league. BUT it doesnt make the 200r4 a bad tranny. Its just not a 700r4 and never will be....

Member

I had an 83 Hurst/Olds with a 403 and a 2004r and a 2:56 rear gear. The 403 makes good torque and the trans held up without any problems and I drove it pretty hard. I replaced a couple rearends because the pin in the rearend kept trying to cut the carrier in half. But never had a transmission problem.

BANNED

I had an 83 Hurst/Olds with a 403 and a 2004r and a 2:56 rear gear. The 403 makes good torque and the trans held up without any problems and I drove it pretty hard. I replaced a couple rearends because the pin in the rearend kept trying to cut the carrier in half. But never had a transmission problem.

Click to expand...

First off, GM never put a 403 in the Cutlass.

Secondly, when the Pontiac Trans Am came with the Olds 403 you could not get it with a stick. If you wanted a stick in a T/A it would only come with the Pontiac 400 engine.

Reason being: The Pontiac 400 had more torque than the Olds 403. GM/Pontiac was concerned about "off the line" bog complaints due to the low torque of the Olds 403 that they would not build a T/A with an Olds 403 and a stick. Look it up, they never made it!

Member

The best a stock Grand National had was the GNX and that was only 274 horse and not that much torque. Big money needs to be spent to make a 2004R hold up to 500 horse. But then, if the OP only has 250 horse then I suppose that a 2004R may hold up.

And remember, a turbo car's power doesn't come on until its mass is already moving.

Click to expand...

It's not the horsepower that's the problem. It's the torque, plus the weight that's the issue ...in MY opinion

Member

This has been debated so many times on here, fact is, the second gen 700r4 is so much better. The through put shaft, the bearing planetary gear and so on. The 200 isnt even in the same league. BUT it doesnt make the 200r4 a bad tranny. Its just not a 700r4 and never will be....

Member

Secondly, when the Pontiac Trans Am came with the Olds 403 you could not get it with a stick. If you wanted a stick in a T/A it would only come with the Pontiac 400 engine.

Reason being: The Pontiac 400 had more torque than the Olds 403. GM/Pontiac was concerned about "off the line" bog complaints due to the low torque of the Olds 403 that they would not build a T/A with an Olds 403 and a stick. Look it up, they never made it!

Click to expand...

GM didn't.....but I did...and the 403 wasn't stock. The original 307 was starting to make noise in the bottom end...so I bought a 403 out of a 79 Trans am...had it built...and swapped over my nitrous to it.

Member

The 2004r would work just fine in a light rod if you can do some of the tweaking to get it adjusted properly. Don't misunderstand me as I have never done one, just research. I elected to use the 700r4 in my pickup because of the creeper gear in 1st. 2004r is close ratio and 700r4 is a truck tranny. If you choose a 700r4 use a 1988 or later and preferably one from a Iroc Camaro or a Vet. This was advice from the immortal Art Carr some years back.
It will probably cost a few extra bucks to build the 200 but you will like the close ratio gears.

Member

I researched this a fair bit myself when choosing a trans for my '30 coupe I am building. The 700r4 late model is definitely a stronger trans from everything I read. It is also large in size. A very tight fit in my Model A but it is in. I am running 4:11 gears in the car so the overdrive was a must. I think the combo will work very well except for one thing. Low gear in the 700r4 is a lot lower than the 200-4r or the 350. I hope it isn't too much of a granny gear and I hope there isn't a huge rpm drop between shifts. The 200-4r had better ratios I thought but it can't take a lot of torque. That's my 2 cents worth.

Member

I have a 2004R in my model a pick up. Weighs 2500 lbs. with me in it. I had a 3.08:1 rear gear in a freebee rearend, it lugged. I changed to a 3.42, it seemes alot better with that gear. I could get away with a 3.73, but 3rd gear seems about rite to me now. When you clunk it in the big hole (4th gear) it drops rpm considerablly. I can burn rubber anytime i want to. Power brake, figure 8s, manual shift anything but neutral drop. I am happy with my 2004r. It cost $600 for the overhaul with a new converter. By the way, if your gonna hammer it, you need to switch off the lockup function until you power out. I have a TCI lockup kit with a toggle swith on the dash and a vacuum switch on the intake. It works automatically unless i want it off. I get 22 MPG. Don't have a tach.

Member

I used 700r4 cause it was only $125.00 and I had just spent $150 on a rebuilt engine along with steering column and rear end 3;73,, I know $275! It all works,,3000 miles and come home on its own steam every time